Facts briefly stated and material for purposes of present appeal are that assessee having furnished return of his net wealth on 29th June, 1979, as against due date of 30th June, 1978, return being admittedly belated one, penalty proceeding were taken against assessee under s. 181(1) (a) of Wealth-tax Act, 1957 and penalty imposed at Rs. 760 with reasoning that assessee has without reasonable cause failed to furnish return in time. stand of party before WTO has been (I) that his new wealth was below taxable limit; (ii) that search was conducted in year 1976 which affected his normal routine; (iii) that returns could be filed after getting approved valuer s report with construction of property was over; (vi) that there was no mala fide intention to delay filling of return; and finally (v) That as and when valuer s report was received, returns for three years including for assessment year under appeal was filed. WTO without discussion negatived stand of assessee and at first appellate stage also assessee failed. ld. AAC being of opinion that return filed by assessee on 20th June, , 1979 declared net wealth at Rs. 1,32,400. AAC also discussed facts that subsequent to filing of original return, i.e. on 30th March, 1982 assessee filed at letter with WTO claiming further liabilities and net wealth stood to Rs. 70,531, but ultimately assessment stood at Rs.4,71,150. He further reasoned that if there was bona fide belief with assessee about his net wealth being below taxable limit, there was no justification for his filling return on 20th June, , 1979. assessee is as yet aggrieved and we have heard parties at length. For asst. yr. 1979-80 vide orders of date made on appeal by Revenue in W.T.A. No. 299 (Del) of 1986 and cross objection by assessee listed as C.O. No. 110 (Del) of 1986, we have upheld directions of le. first appellate authority to value property, subject-matter of net wealth and penal proceedings in accordance with r. IBB, WT Rules if other conditions stand satisfied. For assessment year under appeal, if same directions are applied then certainly net wealth comes to less than taxable quantum and in this view of matter belief of assessee become bona fide and stands to reasons. Giving due consideration of facts of case, reasoning of ld. lower authorities, submissions made before us and fact that with application of r. IBB, WT Rules as method of valuation, net wealth is less than that assessed, we consider it not fit case that warrants levy of penalty. WE have also taken into account marginal assessed wealth as stands. belated filling of net wealth- tax return by assessee, on stated facts is held to be for reasonable and sufficient cause. penalty imposed and sustained by learned lower authorities stands deleted. appeal succeeds. *** RADHEY SHAYAM GUPTA v. WEALTH-TAX OFFICER